When do bands start sucking?

[Barthelme_fan]

Come on, join the rest of the world and offer negative feedback

[quicksilv001]

95% of them sucked from the moment they started making music.

[|adr3naLine|]

Dumb thread.

[Barthelme_fan]

dumb repsonse

[Burn That Shit]

When they stop playing covers. No one wants to hear your shit.

[nateRLP]

when they think that they are bigger than their music.

[ReturnedSnowDay]

Dumb thread.

agreed.

[introduction]

when they think that they are bigger than their music.

exactly.

[theguy77]

just listen to radiohead. they will never disappoint you.

[Sloth7]

When they name themselves "Nickelback"

[Tinno]

When they start to scream or growl.

[yellowhouse]

When they name themselves "Nickelback"

Ultimate truth.

[bard]

95% of them sucked from the moment they started making music.
so true.

[Kurt Retenauer]

Dumb thread.

But awesome avatar :wave:

[xJesusFreakx]

They start to suck when they release an album called Daisy.

[SEPTH]

when they've become boyband with gears for ladies with powerpoppy bubblegum song.

[sleepyseanzzz]

They start to suck when they release an album called Daisy.

hahahaha this, now get out before they crucify you

[klawansie7]

They start to suck when they release an album called Daisy.
even though i agree with you every other person on this site is going to have us murdered....

[BreatheAtlantic]

i dont disagree. daisy sucks.

[andthetruthwill]

When the people who "like" them start being retarded.

[xJesusFreakx]

When the people who "like" them start being retarded.

Yeah, sometimes the quality of the band's fan base can really affect the way their music sounds.

[andthetruthwill]

Yeah, sometimes the quality of the band's fan base can really affect the way their music sounds.

I was referring to the kids who are kind of clueless or just blatant shipjumpers. I've heard soo many people go "I love this band," and they say it over and over with any mention of the bands name, but yet when they hear a song or see the band play, suddenly "I love this band" turns to "This band sucks!." I don't really think bands start "sucking" per se. They do change and shift in and out of particular tastes, but it is the kids who end up in the suck parade because they are just stupid.

[DanTGD]

On a serious note... line-up changes, normally that makes thing abit odd (The Used, Taking Back Sunday, Guns N Roses, Mayday Parade.)

On a less serious note... when a majority look at the fit guy more than listening to the actual music.

[IWasaCamera]

I was referring to the kids who are kind of clueless or just blatant shipjumpers. I've heard soo many people go "I love this band," and they say it over and over with any mention of the bands name, but yet when they hear a song or see the band play, suddenly "I love this band" turns to "This band sucks!." I don't really think bands start "sucking" per se. They do change and shift in and out of particular tastes, but it is the kids who end up in the suck parade because they are just stupid.
"My initial post was inane and now I'm backpedaling."

[andthetruthwill]

"My initial post was inane and now I'm backpedaling."

Um no. I just did not wish to be understood. I do believe a lot of the times that it is the kids who start "sucking" rather than the bands. Interact with kids, go to shows, you'll see what I mean.

[IWasaCamera]

Um no. I just did not wish to be understood. I do believe a lot of the times that it is the kids who start "sucking" rather than the bands. Interact with kids, go to shows, you'll see what I mean.
"I did not assess the matter at hand whatsoever. Whoops."

[andthetruthwill]

"I did not assess the matter at hand whatsoever. Whoops."

No clue what language you are speaking. Care to clarify? The question was "when do bands start sucking?" My answer was they don't, it's the kids who start sucking when they prove their interest in said band is not out of true "like." If you want to take the "when do bands start sucking question?" even more literally, they never do because "sucking" is objective, just like "good" and "bad" music. Every listener has a different opinion. That is why any random band can be considered as starting to suck, because any random kid can say so and spread the word, and not for any legitimate reason.

[under.control]

Daisy made me cry. 21st Century Breakdown, i expected to be terrible, but not THAT terrible. like, gee, remember Kerplunk? Warning? Dookie, for christ's sake? OOOOOOOOOOH and are there any old school Used fans that were completely bewildered by Artwork? Like. What the freaking freak was that album?! Daisy sounded so much more like the Used than Artwork did, and Daisy was Brand New, and Brand New (traditionally) sounds nothing like the Used... but now their new stuff sucks all around, so screw both of them. hmph. AND the song "can't stop partyin'" off of Weezer's new one made me laugh. in the worst, worst way.

[Chrisj182]

When you make an album called The Black Parade.

[cirerelleum]

When you make an album called The Black Parade.

i like this one better

[Robototron]

When you start liking them.

[Tautou107]

On a serious note... line-up changes, normally that makes thing abit odd (The Used, Taking Back Sunday, Guns N Roses, Mayday Parade.)

On a less serious note... when a majority look at the fit guy more than listening to the actual music.
None of those bands were good to start with.

[briewer]

No clue what language you are speaking. Care to clarify? The question was "when do bands start sucking?" My answer was they don't, it's the kids who start sucking when they prove their interest in said band is not out of true "like." If you want to take the "when do bands start sucking question?" even more literally, they never do because "sucking" is objective, just like "good" and "bad" music. Every listener has a different opinion. That is why any random band can be considered as starting to suck, because any random kid can say so and spread the word, and not for any legitimate reason.
You're right. Weezer has matched the quality and greatness of their first two albums with every subsequent release, I just didn't think they did because everyone was saying otherwise.

[IWasaCamera]

No clue what language you are speaking. Care to clarify? The question was "when do bands start sucking?" My answer was they don't, it's the kids who start sucking when they prove their interest in said band is not out of true "like." If you want to take the "when do bands start sucking question?" even more literally, they never do because "sucking" is objective, just like "good" and "bad" music. Every listener has a different opinion. That is why any random band can be considered as starting to suck, because any random kid can say so and spread the word, and not for any legitimate reason.
haha

[andthetruthwill]

You're right. Weezer has matched the quality and greatness of their first two albums with every subsequent release, I just didn't think they did because everyone was saying otherwise.

The "quality" and "greatness" is only significant to you, because you believe it to be there. A kid just listening to the new Weezer record for the first time may think that has "quality" and "greatness," and then go back and listen to the previous records and just be disappointed, because they don't see it as good. To that kid, the old records "suck" and the band improved to something listenable.

[briewer]

The "quality" and "greatness" is only significant to you, because you believe it to be there. A kid just listening to the new Weezer record for the first time may think that has "quality" and "greatness," and then go back and listen to the previous records and just be disappointed, because they don't see it as good. To that kid, the old records "suck" and the band improved to something listenable.
No, I'm pretty sure there's a fairly tangible objective difference between The Blue Album and Pinkerton and the rest of the bullshit they tried to pass off as music, and this hypothetical kid you mention would probably be better off just killing himself.

[andthetruthwill]

No, I'm pretty sure there's a fairly tangible objective difference between The Blue Album and Pinkerton and the rest of the bullshit they tried to pass off as music, and this hypothetical kid you mention would probably be better off just killing himself.

There isn't though. That's the thing. It's only what you feel or what someone else tells you to feel. It's objective, similiar to observing a painting.

[pleasedontask]

No, I'm pretty sure there's a fairly tangible objective difference between The Blue Album and Pinkerton and the rest of the bullshit they tried to pass off as music, and this hypothetical kid you mention would probably be better off just killing himself.\

I know a kid like that. :shrug:

[briewer]

There isn't though. That's the thing. It's only what you feel or what someone else tells you to feel. It's subjective, similiar to observing a painting.
Fixed, and what are you backing this claims with? What makes you think that two objective things existing separate from animated, subjective bodies can't be compared on an objective level? And what, does this mean that you also think that, beyond any human experience, music has no value, that it equates to nothing beyond our meager pointless existences? Or is it the case that music has some value, and each being made under different circumstances by different people during different times has differing values, and thus can be judged at some level beyond merely "I like that"?

EDIT- I just looked at your music tastes, and holy shit, it would be REALLY convenient for you if your music tastes couldn't be compared objectively to mine.

[xJesusFreakx]

No, I'm pretty sure there's a fairly tangible objective difference between The Blue Album and Pinkerton and the rest of the bullshit they tried to pass off as music, and this hypothetical kid you mention would probably be better off just killing himself.

Woah... Slow down there, partner. The "quality" of music is subjective, depending on one's tastes. If you can establish a certain criteria for what defines "good" and "bad," then you can make the objective claim that a band belongs in the "bad" category, but that criteria is still a subjective criteria. There are too many elements of music enjoyment to make any sort of ultimate, universal claims.

Besides, I highly doubt differing tastes in music are enough to warrant death. (Yeah, I know; you were probably just making a hyperbolic statement to prove your point. Still, you should probably chillax.)

[Neo Cassady]

When anyone besides me hears about them.

[stereokiller]

Woah... Slow down there, partner. The "quality" of music is subjective, depending on one's tastes. If you can establish a certain criteria for what defines "good" and "bad," then you can make the objective claim that a band belongs in the "bad" category, but that criteria is still a subjective criteria. There are too many elements of music enjoyment to make any sort of ultimate, universal claims.

Besides, I highly doubt differing tastes in music are enough to warrant death. (Yeah, I know; you were probably just making a hyperbolic statement to prove your point. Still, you should probably chillax.)

i agree.

I think Humbug sucked. So there.

[murrich]

When they don't have a breakdown in every song.

[Genuma]

When they write songs about partying featuring Lil Wayne, who has no business being on their songs.

[murrich]

When anyone besides me hears about them.

This to an extent, but then it's also good because you can be like "I listened to this band before they were popular" and then you can act a bit cooler than everyone else.

[Neo Cassady]

This to an extent, but then it's also good because you can be like "I listened to this band before they were popular" and then you can act a bit cooler than everyone else.

But once they become popular, they suck. So I'm afraid it doesn't really work that way.

[maxvsmaradona]

Daisy made me cry. 21st Century Breakdown, i expected to be terrible, but not THAT terrible. like, gee, remember Kerplunk? Warning? Dookie, for christ's sake? OOOOOOOOOOH and are there any old school Used fans that were completely bewildered by Artwork? Like. What the freaking freak was that album?! Daisy sounded so much more like the Used than Artwork did, and Daisy was Brand New, and Brand New (traditionally) sounds nothing like the Used... but now their new stuff sucks all around, so screw both of them. hmph. AND the song "can't stop partyin'" off of Weezer's new one made me laugh. in the worst, worst way.


YEAH, BOO PROGRESSION AND KEEP WRITING THE SAME SONGS OVER AND OVER AGAIN!

x

[murrich]

But once they become popular, they suck. So I'm afraid it doesn't really work that way.

Yeah that's true, stupid sellouts.

[Fuckmaxbemis]

Bands suck when they intially throw themselves into the art with zero perspective on, you know, cool stuff that I like.

[CollectiveConfusion]

When they stop playing covers. No one wants to hear your shit.

that made me laugh really hard.

[briewer]

Woah... Slow down there, partner. The "quality" of music is subjective, depending on one's tastes. If you can establish a certain criteria for what defines "good" and "bad," then you can make the objective claim that a band belongs in the "bad" category, but that criteria is still a subjective criteria. There are too many elements of music enjoyment to make any sort of ultimate, universal claims.
I disagree, but am too tired to go into it. See the my post above the one I'm quoting now, that's a slight synopsis of my feelings on the subject.

Besides, I highly doubt differing tastes in music are enough to warrant death. (Yeah, I know; you were probably just making a hyperbolic statement to prove your point. Still, you should probably chillax.)
I was kidding when I said someone who likes The Red Album, The Green Album, Maladroit, Make Believe, and Raditiude more than The Blue Album and Pinkerton should kill themselves, but only slightly. VERY slightly.

[briewer]

What the freaking freak was that album?!
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol: :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol: :lol::lol:

[andthetruthwill]

Fixed, and what are you backing this claims with? What makes you think that two objective things existing separate from animated, subjective bodies can't be compared on an objective level? And what, does this mean that you also think that, beyond any human experience, music has no value, that it equates to nothing beyond our meager pointless existences? Or is it the case that music has some value, and each being made under different circumstances by different people during different times has differing values, and thus can be judged at some level beyond merely "I like that"?

EDIT- I just looked at your music tastes, and holy shit, it would be REALLY convenient for you if your music tastes couldn't be compared objectively to mine.

My musical tastes are not represented on my profile. Those are a few of the bands I support and have seen live, some more than others, and have talked to and have seen them talk to and interact with kids, and I back what they do, a few others listed I wish to and hope that they live up to those aspirations that I choose to back them for. And I highly doubt you've even heard of a few of those bands, which would knock out any critqiue you can make because it's very stupid to talk about what someone does not know about, but in no way should any discussion involving anything related to this turn personal, which is a rule I just broke, but I'm trying to make a point. I don't care what you listen to. It doesn't matter. The debate has to be taken outside of youself and applied universally. When people argue here, they go personal and it's stupid. You can't debate anything with personal attacks. Old Weezer is personal to a lot of people, that's why it's considered better, that's what elevates it. The personal connection, that's what makes it not "suck". It's a simple concept. Bands don't start sucking, people "think" they start sucking. It is easy to understand and music has absolutely no value to anyone except the people who "like" it and "think" it doesn't "suck." Music in general is a hobby, a way to pass the time. It doesn't mean anything except to those who choose and want to appreciate it. To some people, all music and all bands "suck." This point can't be debated personally, those feelings don't factor in the argument. What you think "sucks" is the greatest thing in the world to someone else and to another someone else it doesn't even register, it's air conditioner hum.

[five inch taint]

Pretty Fly For A White Guy
Soul Rotation
The Black Album

[skyphoenix]

Well according to 90% of the internet, after the first album.

[TheFractlEffect]

I loved Three Days Grace's ST, and then the next two albums were garbage

[BenWilde]

When they start writing songs for you, and not for themselves

[jay_klinkhammer]

My musical tastes are not represented on my profile. Those are a few of the bands I support and have seen live, some more than others, and have talked to and have seen them talk to and interact with kids, and I back what they do, a few others listed I wish to and hope that they live up to those aspirations that I choose to back them for. And I highly doubt you've even heard of a few of those bands, which would knock out any critqiue you can make because it's very stupid to talk about what someone does not know about, but in no way should any discussion involving anything related to this turn personal, which is a rule I just broke, but I'm trying to make a point. I don't care what you listen to. It doesn't matter. The debate has to be taken outside of youself and applied universally. When people argue here, they go personal and it's stupid. You can't debate anything with personal attacks. Old Weezer is personal to a lot of people, that's why it's considered better, that's what elevates it. The personal connection, that's what makes it not "suck". It's a simple concept. Bands don't start sucking, people "think" they start sucking. It is easy to understand and music has absolutely no value to anyone except the people who "like" it and "think" it doesn't "suck." Music in general is a hobby, a way to pass the time. It doesn't mean anything except to those who choose and want to appreciate it. To some people, all music and all bands "suck." This point can't be debated personally, those feelings don't factor in the argument. What you think "sucks" is the greatest thing in the world to someone else and to another someone else it doesn't even register, it's air conditioner hum.


You are awesome.


Don't fight these trolls on this site that think they can bully people around because they know the words to more Neutral Milk Hotel songs than you.

People that try to win on the internet need to do more things with their lives.

[bastard_of_ness]

When I say so... in fact, while my opinion may change, the fact is that I'm right.

[andthetruthwill]

You are awesome.


Don't fight these trolls on this site that think they can bully people around because they know the words to more Neutral Milk Hotel songs than you.

People that try to win on the internet need to do more things with their lives.


Thank you.

[briewer]

My musical tastes are not represented on my profile. Those are a few of the bands I support and have seen live, some more than others, and have talked to and have seen them talk to and interact with kids, and I back what they do, a few others listed I wish to and hope that they live up to those aspirations that I choose to back them for. And I highly doubt you've even heard of a few of those bands, which would knock out any critqiue you can make because it's very stupid to talk about what someone does not know about, but in no way should any discussion involving anything related to this turn personal, which is a rule I just broke, but I'm trying to make a point.
Umm, what? Of course I know almost all of the bands you have listed on your profile, otherwise I wouldn't have made a snarky comment about them.

I don't care what you listen to. It doesn't matter. The debate has to be taken outside of youself and applied universally. When people argue here, they go personal and it's stupid. You can't debate anything with personal attacks.
Umm, what again? I'm pretty sure that's exactly what I did in my last post.

Fixed, and what are you backing this claims with? What makes you think that two objective things existing separate from animated, subjective bodies can't be compared on an objective level? And what, does this mean that you also think that, beyond any human experience, music has no value, that it equates to nothing beyond our meager pointless existences? Or is it the case that music has some value, and each being made under different circumstances by different people during different times has differing values, and thus can be judged at some level beyond merely "I like that"?
Yeah, that's about as universalist as you can get.

Old Weezer is personal to a lot of people, that's why it's considered better, that's what elevates it. The personal connection, that's what makes it not "suck". It's a simple concept. Bands don't start sucking, people "think" they start sucking. It is easy to understand and music has absolutely no value to anyone except the people who "like" it and "think" it doesn't "suck." Music in general is a hobby, a way to pass the time. It doesn't mean anything except to those who choose and want to appreciate it. To some people, all music and all bands "suck." This point can't be debated personally, those feelings don't factor in the argument. What you think "sucks" is the greatest thing in the world to someone else and to another someone else it doesn't even register, it's air conditioner hum.
You make the claim that personal preferences and feelings shouldn't play a role in it, and then give me an example based solely off of personal preferences. Okay, so person A thinks a band is good and person B thinks they suck. So what? Maybe one of them is completely wrong in their assumptions. Person A thinks the Earth revolves around the Sun, while person B thinks the Sun revolves around the Earth. See? Astronomy is completely subjective! Yay! If you're going to go beyond the personal, then effing go beyond the personal. Don't tell me that since some jackass might think the Velvet Underground or Talking Heads are boring, then I can't conclude anything universally about them, because if I can conclude anything universally about them, the fact that said jackass disagrees changes nothing. He'd just be wrong about it.

And yeah, I'm going to respectfully disagree with your "music is essentially valueless" theory. Music is an art form, and as such has some form of intrinsic value beyond the people merely enjoying it at present. I can't agree with the thought that someone who pours their entire selves into their medium, who literally kills themselves for their craft, is making something with zero value beyond himself and his listeners, and is merely "passing the time". What he or she did means something. It equates to something. It has some value that goes above and beyond its passive and active participants.

You are awesome.


Don't fight these trolls on this site that think they can bully people around because they know the words to more Neutral Milk Hotel songs than you.

People that try to win on the internet need to do more things with their lives.
What? I'm a troll for disagreeing with him and engaging in a discussion in the discussion forum? Fuck off, clown.

[kearn1tm]

Q: When do bands start sucking?

A: When they run out of money. The streets are rough.

A: When brYan starts listening to them!

[andthetruthwill]

Umm, what? Of course I know almost all of the bands you have listed on your profile, otherwise I wouldn't have made a snarky comment about them.


Umm, what again? I'm pretty sure that's exactly what I did in my last post.


Yeah, that's about as universalist as you can get.


You make the claim that personal preferences and feelings shouldn't play a role in it, and then give me an example based solely off of personal preferences. Okay, so person A thinks a band is good and person B thinks they suck. So what? Maybe one of them is completely wrong in their assumptions. Person A thinks the Earth revolves around the Sun, while person B thinks the Sun revolves around the Earth. See? Astronomy is completely subjective! Yay! If you're going to go beyond the personal, then effing go beyond the personal. Don't tell me that since some jackass might think the Velvet Underground or Talking Heads are boring, then I can't conclude anything universally about them, because if I can conclude anything universally about them, the fact that said jackass disagrees changes nothing. He'd just be wrong about it.

And yeah, I'm going to respectfully disagree with your "music is essentially valueless" theory. Music is an art form, and as such has some form of intrinsic value beyond the people merely enjoying it at present. I can't agree with the thought that someone who pours their entire selves into their medium, who literally kills themselves for their craft, is making something with zero value beyond himself and his listeners, and is merely "passing the time". What he or she did means something. It equates to something. It has some value that goes above and beyond its passive and active participants.


What? I'm a troll for disagreeing with him and engaging in a discussion in the discussion forum? Fuck off, clown.

Fancy post, but this isn't worth continuing. And it's not nice to swear.

[briewer]

Q: When do bands start sucking?

A: When they run out of money. The streets are rough.

A: When brYan starts listening to them!
That's Cellir to you, madame.

Fancy post, but this isn't worth continuing. And it's not nice to swear.
Huh. I thought we were on the verge of getting somewhere.

[codybretto13]

when they hit main-stream.

[kearn1tm]

That's Cellir to you, madame.

Why are you so racist?!

[briewer]

Why are you so racist?!
I am not. I listen to Hootie and the Blowfish. Sing along if you know the words!

100009252

[reptilaa]

When they get pretty old.
Placebo. Their 6th album is bad comparing with their previously 4. Hm.

[kearn1tm]

I am not. I listen to Hootie and the Blowfish. Sing along if you know the words!

100009252

Which one's the white guy? I can't tell.

[tawtaw]

When they name themselves "Nickelback"

Going to see them tonight with my Dad because he really likes them. We used to jam to them when I was, like, 12.

[Sloth7]

Going to see them tonight with my Dad because he really likes them. We used to jam to them when I was, like, 12.


Well, I always think it's great when parents and kids can bond over music. So, despite what I said, I think that's pretty awesome.

[briewer]

Which one's the white guy? I can't tell.
This one:

http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlDC/original/KOlbermann.jpg

[JustAGirl01]

YEAH, BOO PROGRESSION AND KEEP WRITING THE SAME SONGS OVER AND OVER AGAIN!

x

I'm glad you understood what that rant was about haha